← All Phrases

“scrutiny assessment”

Assessment ProceduresSection 143(3)Section 143(3)7,671 judgments

The decision most relied on for scrutiny assessment is CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (332 ITR 167), cited in 897 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on scrutiny assessment

CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd.
332 ITR 167 · 2011 · High Court
897
citing judgments

The Commissioner cannot revise an assessment under Section 263 merely because the assessment order does not explicitly reflect an inquiry, or because the Commissioner holds a different opinion. An inquiry, even if considered inadequate, or an assessment based on a plausible view by the Assessing Officer after due examination, does not automatically make the order erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.

Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO
203 ITR 456 · 1993 · Supreme Court
396
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are valid even after a scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3), provided the Assessing Officer forms a reason to believe, based on definite, specific, and reliable information, that income escaped assessment due to the assessee's failure to fully and truly disclose material facts.

Sanjay Bimalchand Jain v. PCIT-1, Nagpur
89 Taxmann.com 196 · 2018 · High Court
251
citing judgments

The exemption for long-term capital gains on share transactions is unavailable if the assessee fails to discharge the onus of proving the genuineness of gains arising from dubious share transactions designed to convert unaccounted income into tax-exempt capital gains. Courts will uphold an assessment based on the Revenue's evidence of price rigging or penny stock manipulation if the assessee cannot provide cogent evidence for the abnormal rise in share value.

CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.
188 ITR 44 · 1991 · Supreme Court
204
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer has a duty to examine whether an assessee's books of account truly disclose the correct income and is not bound to accept the accounting system regularly employed by the assessee or methods followed in earlier years. Each assessment year is a distinct and self-contained unit for tax purposes.

Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Subodh Agarwal
149 Taxmann.com 373 · 2023 · High Court
194
citing judgments

Approval of draft assessment orders under Section 153D must be granted with due application of mind, not mechanically. Approving multiple cases, such as 38 in a single day, without proper scrutiny amounts to mechanical approval, rendering the assessment invalid.

ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd.
92 Taxmann.com 361 · 2018 · Supreme Court
194
citing judgments

Reassessment under Section 147/148 is invalid if it constitutes a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer without any fresh tangible material, especially after the assessee made a full and truthful disclosure during the original scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3).

Narayanappa v. CIT
63 ITR 219 · 1967 · Supreme Court
187
citing judgments

The approval required from a higher authority under section 153D of the Income Tax Act is an administrative act, not a quasi-judicial one. Consequently, an opportunity of hearing is not required to be given to the assessee at the stage of obtaining such approval, provided the approving authority is competent.

CIT v. Ralson Industries Ltd. 5
288 ITR 322 · 2007 · Supreme Court
153
citing judgments

The Supreme Court affirmed that lower authorities are bound by decisions of higher authorities due to judicial discipline. It also clarified that the Commissioner, in exercising revisional power under Section 263, can conduct necessary inquiries to determine if an assessment is prejudicial to the Revenue.

Judgments citing scrutiny assessment

Six Continents Hotels Inc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1459/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

quashed the assessment orders on non-compliance of the DIN requirement. (vi) For A .Y . 2019-20, the matter was not picked up for scrutiny assessment and there was no assessment order . 17. Keeping in view of the above , the issue o f taxability of marketing and reservation related receipts

Six Continents Hotels Inc., Usa vs. ACIT Circle- 3 (1)(2) - International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 373/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

quashed the assessment orders on non-compliance of the DIN requirement. (vi) For A .Y . 2019-20, the matter was not picked up for scrutiny assessment and there was no assessment order . 17. Keeping in view of the above , the issue o f taxability of marketing and reservation related receipts

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1878/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

mine development expenses made at the close of the financial year. In continuation, it was submitted that the assessee’s case was subjected to scrutiny assessments u/s.143(3) of the Act for the AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15. During the course of such proceedings, the AO had the occasion ... mine development expenses claimed by the assessee. In this backdrop, the assessee argued that once such expenses have been duly examined and accepted in scrutiny assessments, the same cannot be disregarded or characterized as bogus in the absence of any fresh tangible or incriminating evidence brought on record

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1877/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri. R.Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

mine development expenses made at the close of the financial year. In continuation, it was submitted that the assessee's case was subjected to scrutiny assessments u/s.143(3) of the Act for the AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15. During the course of such proceedings, the AO had the occasion ... mine development expenses claimed by the assessee. In this backdrop, the assessee argued that once such expenses have been duly examined and accepted in scrutiny assessments, the same cannot be disregarded or characterized as bogus in the absence of any fresh tangible or incriminating evidence brought on record

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1875/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1872, 1873, 1875, 1877 & 1878/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle -2, Madurai. Vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt. Ltd., 500, Pantheaon Road, Egmore S.O., Chennai - 600 008. [Pan: Aaact-3408-N] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R.Venkata Raman, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2025 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : These Five Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Id.Cit(A)”]. The Impugned Orders Of The Id.Cit(A) Arise Out Of The Assessment Orders Framed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Madurai [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ao”], In Respect Of The Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2017-18. The Particulars Of The Respective Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Set Out Hereinbelow:- S. No

For Appellant: Shri. R.Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

mine development expenses made at the close of the financial year. In continuation, it was submitted that the assessee's case was subjected to scrutiny assessments u/s.143(3) of the Act for the AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15. During the course of such proceedings, the AO had the occasion ... mine development expenses claimed by the assessee. In this backdrop, the assessee argued that once such expenses have been duly examined and accepted in scrutiny assessments, the same cannot be disregarded or characterized as bogus in the absence of any fresh tangible or incriminating evidence brought on record

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1873/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

mine development expenses made at the close of the financial year. In continuation, it was submitted that the assessee’s case was subjected to scrutiny assessments u/s.143(3) of the Act for the AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15. During the course of such proceedings, the AO had the occasion ... mine development expenses claimed by the assessee. In this backdrop, the assessee argued that once such expenses have been duly examined and accepted in scrutiny assessments, the same cannot be disregarded or characterized as bogus in the absence of any fresh tangible or incriminating evidence brought on record

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Transworld Garnet India Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1872/CHNY/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

mine development expenses made at the close of the financial year. In continuation, it was submitted that the assessee’s case was subjected to scrutiny assessments u/s.143(3) of the Act for the AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15. During the course of such proceedings, the AO had the occasion ... mine development expenses claimed by the assessee. In this backdrop, the assessee argued that once such expenses have been duly examined and accepted in scrutiny assessments, the same cannot be disregarded or characterized as bogus in the absence of any fresh tangible or incriminating evidence brought on record

Tiruchengodu Sengodagounder, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1961/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1961/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Tiruchangodu Sengodagounder Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Ramasamy Khannaiyann, Income Tax, 67, Avarampalayam Road, K.R. Puram, Central Circle 1, Coimbatore 641 006. Coimbatore. [Pan:Afzpk7832C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Dharshan Bothra, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 20, Chennai, For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 72 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which Really

For Appellant: Shri S. Dharshan Bothra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153A

assessment order passed under section 153A of the Act and prayed that the ld. CIT(A) should have retained same stand as taken against scrutiny assessment. 6. The ld. DR Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. CIT supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 4 I.T.A. No.1961/Chny/25

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Meerut, Income Tax Office vs. Umalok Charitable Trust, Meerut

In the result, impugned order is upheld and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1644/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.1644/िद"ी/2024(िन.व. 2011-12) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Bhainsali Ground, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Meerut, Uttar Pradesh 250001 बनाम Vs. Umalok Charitable Trust, C-111, Samart Place, Garh Road, Meerut, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Uttar Pradesh 250004 Pan: Aaatu-1532-F अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(Dr) "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Advocate सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 24/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Noida [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 14.02.2024, For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Revenue In Appeal Has Primarily Assailed The Order Of Cit(A) On Two Counts:- (I) Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,11,00,000/- Made On Account Of Unexplained Advances; & (Ii) Deleting The Disallowance Of Exemption Claimed By The Assessee U/S.10(23C)Of The Act Rs.84,22,244/-.

For Appellant: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Advocate
Section 10Section 10(23)(c)Section 12ASection 153C

trustees on behalf of the assessee. Subsequently, the transaction did not materialize; hence, the transfer of land did not take place. During scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to explain the source of advance paid to Shree Ram Social Welfare Trust. The assessee explained the source

Parasuraman, Cuddalore vs. Assessing Officer, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2093/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2093/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2022-23 Parasuraman, Income Tax Officer, No.155/2, Middle Street, Vs. Ward-2, Kadampuliyur & Post, Cuddalore. Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu-607 103. [Pan:Clqpp6548F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : None प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Revenue By : Mr.C.P.Solomon, Jcit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 21.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh, Am : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi, (In Short Ld.Cit(A) For The Assessment Year 2022-23, Vide Order Dated 23.06.2025. 2.0 The Only Issue To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Ld.Cit(A) Was Justified In Confirming The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271B Of The Act In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Instant Case.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr.C.P.Solomon, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

Government Registration Department. For rendering this services, the assessee was getting commission which was duly offered in the tax return. During the course of scrutiny assessment of the assessee framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 12.02.2024 wherein the source for cash deposits made by the assessee ... said commission has been offered to tax by the assessee as income from business and which has been accepted by the Ld.AO in the scrutiny assessment as such. Hence, having accepted the assessee to be deriving only commission income and having accepted the modus operandi of the same

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, Tiruvannamalai

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are

ITA 1655/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CA
Section 1Section 132Section 139(1)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

case of Kavita Jasjit Singh Vs CIT(A) [2023] 157 taxmann.com 756 (Mumbai - Trib.) the Honble Mumbai Tribunal had held that Where during scrutiny assessment proceedings, assessee suo moto furnished a revised computation and offered interest on income tax refund to tax, non-declaration of interest on income tax refund

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, Thiruvannamalai

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are

ITA 1654/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CA
Section 1Section 132Section 139(1)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

case of Kavita Jasjit Singh Vs CIT(A) [2023] 157 taxmann.com 756 (Mumbai - Trib.) the Honble Mumbai Tribunal had held that Where during scrutiny assessment proceedings, assessee suo moto furnished a revised computation and offered interest on income tax refund to tax, non-declaration of interest on income tax refund

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, Thiruvannamalai

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are

ITA 1653/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CA
Section 1Section 132Section 139(1)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

case of Kavita Jasjit Singh Vs CIT(A) [2023] 157 taxmann.com 756 (Mumbai - Trib.) the Honble Mumbai Tribunal had held that Where during scrutiny assessment proceedings, assessee suo moto furnished a revised computation and offered interest on income tax refund to tax, non-declaration of interest on income tax refund

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, Tiruvannamalai

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are

ITA 1652/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CA
Section 1Section 132Section 139(1)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

case of Kavita Jasjit Singh Vs CIT(A) [2023] 157 taxmann.com 756 (Mumbai - Trib.) the Honble Mumbai Tribunal had held that Where during scrutiny assessment proceedings, assessee suo moto furnished a revised computation and offered interest on income tax refund to tax, non-declaration of interest on income tax refund

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, Tiruvannamalai

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are

ITA 1651/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CA
Section 1Section 132Section 139(1)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

case of Kavita Jasjit Singh Vs CIT(A) [2023] 157 taxmann.com 756 (Mumbai - Trib.) the Honble Mumbai Tribunal had held that Where during scrutiny assessment proceedings, assessee suo moto furnished a revised computation and offered interest on income tax refund to tax, non-declaration of interest on income tax refund

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, Chennai

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are

ITA 1650/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CA
Section 1Section 132Section 139(1)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

case of Kavita Jasjit Singh Vs CIT(A) [2023] 157 taxmann.com 756 (Mumbai - Trib.) the Honble Mumbai Tribunal had held that Where during scrutiny assessment proceedings, assessee suo moto furnished a revised computation and offered interest on income tax refund to tax, non-declaration of interest on income tax refund

Navudai Shikshan and Jan Kalyan Sewa Samiti, Kanpur vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 96/LKW/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2016-17 Navudai Shikshan & Jan Kalyan Sewa Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Samiti, 117/K/30, Sarvodaya Nagar, Tax (Exemption), Lucknow Kanpur-208005 Pan: Aagfn4916N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.10.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit (Exemption), Lucknow Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 30.03.2021 Setting Aside The Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act For The A.Y. 2016-17 On 15.12.2018. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “01. Because The Order Passed By Cit(E) U/S 263 Of The Act Dt. 30.03.2021 Is Without Jurisdiction, Bad In Law & Be Quashed. 02. Because The Order Passed By Ao, Being Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue The Action Of The Cit(E) Set-Asiding The Said Order Is Without Jurisdiction, Contrary To The Provisions Of Law, Be Quashed. 03. Because The Order Passed By The Ao Being Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue, The Cit(E) Has Erred In Law In Setting Aside The Same, The Order Passed By Cit(E) Be Quashed & That As Passed By The Ao Be Restored. 04. Because The Cit(E) Has Failed To Appreciate That The Initial Assessment Was A Deep Scrutiny Assessment Framed U/S 143(3) Wherein Voluminous Queries Were Raised Which Were Complied With & Thoroughly Examined/ Verified By The Ao, The Necessary Enquiring Having Being Done, It Is Neither A Case Of No Inquiring Or Lack Of Enquiring, As Such The Cit(E) Has Erred In Setting Aside The Assessment Order, The Order Passed By Cit(E) Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

that as passed by the AO be restored. 04. Because the CIT(E) has failed to appreciate that the initial assessment was a deep scrutiny assessment framed u/s 143(3) wherein voluminous queries were raised which were complied with and thoroughly examined/ verified by the AO, the necessary enquiring having ... prejudicial to the interest of Revenue nor erroneous inasmuch as that initial assessment order had been passed after a deep scrutiny assessment framed under section 143(3) where a number of queries had been raised which had been complied with and which had been thoroughly 5 Navudai Shikshan

Spandana Sphoorty Financial Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle 3(2), Hyderabad

ITA 821/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 69A

book profit" under section 115JB of Rs.102,27,40,249/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee company was selected for scrutiny assessment under CASS. Notice under section 143(2), dated 09.08.2018, was issued to the assessee. 3. During the course of the assessment proceedings, it was observed

Slr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 544/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2018-19
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263

PCIT in 263 proceedings has been thoroughly examined by the AO in assessment proceedings. In fact, the sole purpose for taking up for scrutiny assessment is to verify expenses incurred for earning exempt income and investments / advances appeared in the balance sheet. The assessee has filed its financial statement

Anguri Devi Khandelwal (Radha Mohan Khandelwal (Legal Heir), Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle-4, Jaipur

ITA 389/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, Ld. C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurva Awasthi, Ld. JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148A

filed return u/s 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). During pendency of separate scrutiny assessment proceedings u/s 143 of the Act, notices dated 29.03.2022, dated 23.09.2022, dated 21.10.2022 were issued. On 19.12.2022, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued. Letters